Pac-10 football: Examining the APR data

Did an item a few weeks ago on the San Jose State football program’s much-improved Academic Progress Rates and received numerous requests (on the Hotline and via email and phone) for similar info on Cal and Stanford.

In response, here are the figures for all Pac-10 football teams over the course of the APR’s existence.

(For those unfamiliar: The NCAA implemented the APR in the 2003-04 academic year as a means of tracking eligibility, retention and graduation — it’s a better measure of overall academic performance than graduation rates.)

Listed below are the multi-year football scores: the numbers used by the NCAA to determine whether schools are penalized for substandard performance. (The benchmark is 925.)

That means the 2003-04 figures are for that year alone, since it was the first year … and the 2004-05 numbers are the average of 03-04 and 04-05 … and so on.

The NCAA uses a four-year rolling average, which means the multi-year figures for 2007-08 do not include the 2003-04 academic year.

I found the scores from the early years of the APR very interesting, because it shows which schools weren’t getting it done academically — a score below 900 is not getting it done, in my opinion — when there was no oversight and no fear of punishment.

You can also see which schools have gotten their act together and which have not.

For context: The 2007-08 average score for all FBS programs is 941.

I’ve listed the schools in order of the most-recent multi-year average, highest to lowest.

Jon Wilner

Post navigation

Interesting. For San Jose State, you had access to the ’07/’08 4 year rolling average (APR=888) as well as the single year scores that made up that average.

Can you access the last 4 single year scores for Cal & Stanford? I think it would be interesting to see.

Furdman

Once again Stanford is number one!!! The Cardinal is #1 and the Cal Bears are #2 just the way it should be..(and the way it usually is) It will be difficult for Cal to ever over-take Stanford in the brains department..This is proven out daily on Wilner’s College Sports Hotline blogging site. Just read the dribble posted by the likes of VC. I wonder what the APR scores are for the 08-09 Cal bloggers?

NotSoOldBlue

Can you still withdraw from a class at Stanford after you’ve taken the final?

Does Berkeley still lose 40% of a freshman class by their junior year?

Neither of those may still be the case, but it’s hard to compare the academics of a state run university to a private university. Their missions are different. Berkeley lets more people in and then it’s sink or swim. Stanford lets very few people in and then works hard to make sure they graduate. (I preferred the Cal sink-or-swim model – but it’s not for everyone.)

In athletics, I suppose, those differences are less extreme because both types of schools should be doing their best to help the athletes get an education. And clearly both Cal and Stanford do that… But the basic missions may account for some of the difference as well.

mk92

@ NotSoOldBlue — Stanford eliminated that option back in the mid-90s and now has a more typical add/drop deadline.

PapaBear

Good point about the public vs private school approaches. Wilner lists the 941 average for ALL Bowl Subdivision Schools. But within that number, the average for Private Institutions is 961 and the average for Public Institutions is 931.

So Kudos to Stanford for topping the private school average by 23 points. And MAJOR KUDOS to Cal for topping the public school average by 39 points.

UCB-1955

When I was at Cal, the University of Michigan was seen as the model public university – with a winning athletic tradition and a strong academic reputation.

I see Michigan Football’s multiyear APR is 947. I guess they’re no longer “the champions of the west”!

GO BIG BLUE, SHOW WHAT YOU CAN DO!

Harold

There was NEVER an option to withdraw from a class at Stanford after taking the final. In the late 1960s, up until sometime in the 1980s, the dealine for withdrawal from a class was 24 hours before the final. Regardless of what you think of that policy, which was changed long ago, it would have done nothing to raise APR rates and might even have lowered them.

The APR has to do not with gradepoint but graduation rates. A student who stayed in a course all quarter long, then dropped it at the last moment, would find himself three or four or five hours short of a full class load. Doing that even once, under some circumstances, could put you on academic probation; doing it twice in a school year almost certainly would.

milo

Under Tedford Cal has steadily improved in the classroom to above the private school average and is now a perennial Top 25 team. Excellent job Cal. Go Bears!

So are there any other schools that can do this?

MEG Hoopster

I’ve read that an APR score of 925 equates to a graduation rate of 60%. Presumably a perfect APR score of 1,000 equates to a graduation rate of 100%.

So Mr. Wilner, is it a linear equation? Can you reach out to your NCAA contacts and determine what the Pac-10 APR scores equate to in graduation rates?

mk92

@Harold — minor point: the 24 hours before finals policy was in existence into the 90s (I graduated in the early 90s, and it was still in place when I graduated).

Steve O

Cal will never catch Stanfurd? Well based on the data presented in the five year window, Stanfurd’s scores have dropped 1% and Cal’s have gone up 5% so in five more years….just maybe?

Vintage Cal

Congrats to Stanfurd for being #1. Of course espn (Ted Miller) and The Bleacher Report both have Stanfurd as #10 [for toughest Pac-10 Road Venues]. Both reports reference the lack of a home crowd!

Stanfurd gets a top mark “A” in APR and classroom and a C on the field.

Conversely, Cal gets a B+ in the APR/classroom and an A- on the field. I’ll go with the higher GPA in this case. Go Bears!

Kerr

So USC has a higher APR than UCLA for every school year since the APR began? How will the gutty little Bruins try to spin that?

Bixby23

@Furdman:

1. Don’t hyphenate “overtake”

2. The word you were grasping for is “drivel,” not “dribble”

3. Only one period is required after a sentence, not two (and an ellipsis is three)

Please continue your lecture about Stanford’s brains department, and I would really like to know what “proven out” means, as opposed to merely “proven”

Jacob Wang

Boy, some schools were [comparatively] in really bad shape during the mid-00s [Hello, Arizona Wildcats]. I also notice some schools’ scores DROPPED between 2003-04 & ’04-05. Stanford also saw a dropoff between 2004-05: 995 and 2005-06: 984, during which time there was a coaching change from Buddy Teevens to Walt Harris, while Cal went from 2004-05: 945 (when it flirted with a Rose Bowl bid) to 2005-06: 965

BearCub

Milo, You give Cal an A- on the football field? That’s ridiculous! Cal takes good talent and consistently under achieves, they lose games every year that they shouldn’t, and last year they were lucky to make it to the 6th place PAC 10 finish “Nut Bowl” in Frisco. A-, I think not!! Maybe a C, or a C+ at the highest. Tedford is a “C” coach. He recruits great talent and coaches them down to mediocracy. I will admit if you compare him to Holmoe it’s easy to get overly excited & think he’s a great coach. But, reality can not be ignored. Average at best!

Furdman

Bix23,
Nice post, ha ha…Maybe next time you can come up with an actual intelligent thought. When someone has nothing worthwhile to contribute they usually try to nit pick (is that one word?) someone else..You are obviously a little short in APR department. I can hardly wait to read your next idiotic post!! (2 !’s) BTW, I did mean dribble-just check your chin & shirt.

Dubya

Wow milo, Emerald Bowl = A-?

PapaBear

It is obvious that BearCub is wrong, when he has to distort the facts to “support” his argument.

Cal Football finished 4th in the conference last year, with a 6-3 conference mark. Implying a 6th place finish is an outright lie.

BearCub is an idiot. Cal hardly gets talent on par with USC and the other top football programs. Just look at the star ratings. Players are coached UP at Cal under Coach Tedford. Can you say Alex Mack?!? Cal was the only school to offer him, and now he’s a first round draft pick.

UCB-1955

If Coach Tedford is a “C” Coach, there are a lot of schools that would like to have such an “average” coach.

Tedford inherited a 1-10 team and in 7 years has posted a 59-30 record (ie: nearly a .667 winning percentage) including a 5-1 bowl mark.

There’s a lot of head coaches out there who would die for such a résumé.

Gutty Little Bruin

UCLA doesn’t have a Senora Ross handing out grades to students who don’t even show up to class.

Bearfan

To expand on what NotSoOldBlue said about Cal’s sink or swim vs Stanford’s carebear approach:

Wish I could find that Merc news article about the Stanford Pre Meds who would go to SCU during the summer to take physics to get the “easy A”.

Beargoggles

As a Cal alum with a brother who went to Stanford, I think I have a reasonable perspective.

The truth of the matter is that it is virtually impossible for ANY student to fail out of Stanford where there is extreme grade inflation. At Stanford, grades below a C are rarely given out (and C’s are pretty rare). This applies to both students and student-athletes. As such, it is not surprising that Stanford has a high APR – how could they not if the worse grade is a C making it impossible for an athlete to fail out? How the Lopez twin failed is beyond me – I suspect he didn’t attend class or blew off tests.

In contrast, Cal typically grades on a curve. The lower end of the class will receive C’s and D’s. F’s are not unheard of. There is a much higher risk that a student at Cal – including athletes – will fail out or not meet NCAA eligibility requirements.

Also, the APR goes down if players leave early for the NFL. Cal has had several players leave early in recent years (Aaron Rodgers, Marshawn Lynch, Desean Jackson, Morrah) while Stanford has not had any that I recall (primarily because Stanford’s players lacked the talent to be drafted). As such, Stanford’s poor football team/talent has helped bolster its APR. That’s not necessarily something to be proud of.

BearCub

Vintage Cal, since when did Tedford take over coaching the offensive line? The “O” line coach is responsible for Mack’s continued improvement & development. The best thing that happen to Mack was that Tedford stayed away from coaching the O-Line. Look what happen at QB over the past couple of years. QB coaching is suppose to be Tedford’s strength. Scarey huh? Watching the Cal QBs self-destruct each season has become commonplace. Vintage, I have to say that I believe you’re the flaming idiot on this site.

Benny Kovacs

Actually., Alex Mack had several pac-10 offers including UCLA, however, Bearcub is an idiot-it’s called “body of work.” Yes 9 wins equals A-, dub! Bearcub if you’re only 11 years old, excuse my insult, but calling Tedford a “C” coach is absolutely insane. You should be flogged in Ludwig’s Foutain with wooden coarhangers for that remark.

milo

Methinks Ye Olde BearCub is a troll of some sort.

Any way, you know if you shell out $45k a year for school, your kid better get at least Bs or it’s worthless. Okay I jest but I will say this, the sink or swim/Darwinian environment at Cal produces better students in the end and that’s reflected in how many Nobels have been produced from the student ranks. 25, twenty-freakin’-five to a single digit seven for Furd.

Yeah, I had to mention the Nobels because Cal OWNS Stanfurd on that front and while the APR for football is important, we at the University of California look to the big picture.

Go Bears!

Stanford Yapping

Attended the Thursday & Friday Softball Super Regional at Stanford. Makes one wonder if the fix was in, as Arizona is better recognized in the Oklahoma City college softball world. Ca-ching!

Hats off to the dumb jocks at Arizona. Their softball team had an APR of 945, which scores in the 10-20th percentile of the sport. Stanford softball posted a perfect 1000 APR score.

So Arizona may have won on the field, with the help of some questionable calls, but Stanford smokes them in the classroom.

Vintage Cal

“Softball?! Don’t talk about softball! You kidding me?! Softball?!”

MEG Hoopster

Stanford Yapper:

SO WHAT if Stanford is once again eliminated at the Super Regional. WHO CARES if they lost at home, to a lower seed!

The outcome won’t effect what Stanford cares most about (and no one else gives a sh*t about): your cherished Directors’ Cup Trophy!

Stanford Yapping

Benny et al:
I know you Cal guys are just giddy with excitement over the hiring of Andy Ludwig, but have you really already named a landmark after him?!? Gimme a break. At least let him coach a game first, before you annoint him!

Not that I’m horribly offended or surprised by your specious student data. Personally, I consider Cal and Stanford students to be intellectual peers. Given that Cal alums must outnumber Stanford alums by a large ratio, I would expect such results. I’m just not convinced that your source is reliable.

But of all of your favorite blasts, I guarantee you that “The band is on the field!” burns my ears a much deeper shade of red than 25-to-7. But nothing burns me as much as my brother-in-law teaching my 2 year-old Cal cheers. Bear territory my foot!

Matt G

Furdman says,

“Just read the dribble posted by the likes of VC.”

Um, I think the word you want is “drivel.” “Dribble” is something they do in this sport called basketball.

Just a little friendly help from a Golden Bear

Michael

@ BearGoggles

Good point about the NFL; Stanford actually hasn’t done as horribly as one could easily imagine in terms of producing NFL players (Trent Edwards), but the numbers are probably lower and few leave early.

On grade inflation, I agree, there are not very many Cs and below here on the farm. But there are two things to consider before going with the whole “Cal is tougher” line of thought

1) Stanford is a lot harder to get into. The kids who do get in for the most part are crazy for grades. Is there some inflation? Sure. But part of the difference is that a lower percentage of them perform badly enough to get Cs and below.

Trust me, I’ve seen way too many people freaking out over various types of Bs. It is not only grade inflation in that they complain until they get them raised–though this does happen–but also in that lots of people work as hard as possible to make sure they have above 3.0 or whatever it is they desire.

2) Berkeley’s a hell of a lot bigger. This means more anonymity and presumably less distribution of resources, the “sink or swim” model. This doesn’t necessarily mean grade inflation, but it does probably reflect a public/private difference.

Finally, Brook Lopez, like many of the kids at Cal, failed a class because he didn’t turn in the final paper. This happens rarely at stanford, because like I said, kids care too much to let that happen very often and someone will usually pursue you about it. As a varsity athlete, you bet someone chased him down, but not soon enough to avoid probation.

Beargoggles

@Michael

We seem to be mostly in agreement.

Your explanation/justification for grade inflation seems to confirm my basic premise – its almost impossible for an athlete to get a bad grade at Stanford thereby distorting the APR.

Implicit in your statment is the notion that because Stanford students are presumbed by Stanford faculty to be “smarter than a typical college student,” they don’t give grades below C. The fallacy is that absent athletics, most Stanford football players would not be admitted to Stanford (or Cal for that matter). As such, the football players benefit from the soft curve even thought the basic assumption – being “smarter than most” – really doesn’t apply.

Stanford is what it is – I’m not really being critical. While they have very different missions, both Cal and Stanford have excellent students and much to be proud of.

What many Cal alumni find irritiating is that some at Stanford point to the APR as if it reflects higher academic achievment by the football team, when clearly it is more reflective of grade inflation and an environment where its nearly impossible to fail out. This is added to the fact that your football coach and others like to quote (and negatively recruit with) 8 year old academic data that tends to show Cal in a bad light – data that reflects serious problems in the program pre-Tedford.

Furdman

Matt,
Thanks for the “dribble” to “drivel” correction. If anyone knows about drivel it’s Cal fans. Cal fans have been spouting out “DRIVEL” for years! You guys are experts on drivel I’m sure there is a major field of study on drivel at Cal that students can major in..I’m quite sure several of our outstanding Cal bloggers have advanced degrees in drivel. VintageC must have a PHD in drivel. Anyway thanks for your friendly help-&-keep on driveling. You Cal guys are great drivelers!

Stanford Yapping

FROM THE MERC NEWS: SAN JOSE STATE FAILS TO EARN NCAA BASEBALL TOURNAMENT INVITE
The San Jose State Spartans (41-20) won the Western Athletic Conference regular season title, but were unable to secure an automatic bid in the NCAA tournament when they lost in the semifnals of the WAC tournament on Saturday night. SJSU’s at-large bid was undercut by its modest RPI (76) and a strength of schedule ranked 169th.

Hey Spartie Fans – the ones who complained of all the Stanford & Cal yapping, and were bragging about making a run in the baseball ncaa’s: YOU CAN’T MAKE A RUN WHEN YOU’RE NOT EVEN INVITED!

Stanford Yapping

UCB-1955 WAS PROPHETIC WHEN ON AN EARLIER THREAD HE WROTE:

UCB-1955 says:
May 18th, 2009 at 9:34 am

on taggie’s topic

Perhaps the Hot Line doesn’t cover college baseball because no one really cares, NOT EVEN SJSU STUDENTS & ALUMS! San Jose finished the WAC season this weekend at home, and drew an average of 608 fans per day. Not exactly rabid support!

Most of them are probably “band-wagon jumpers”, like taggie, who know next to nothing about college baseball. NO WAY SJSU “looks to be in pretty good position to make the COLLEGE WORLD SERIES” as taggie projects. Making the CWS means making the final 8 in Omaha. Not going to happen for the Spartans who went 15-7 in the weak WAC.

In fact if SJSU doesn’t win the WAC tourney, they’re probably not going to get an invite to the NCAA regional playoffs. The WAC will probably get just a single bid/invite, and it will go to the automatic qualifier (WAC tourney winner).

There you go taggie. You’ve gotten your wish. A little college baseball chatter!

Vintage Cal

Ranger John says:
May 20th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Boy, I am so glad I went to SJS!!!

It says that Berkeley has GRADUATED (not affiliated) 25 Nobel Lauretes and Stanfurd 7. An elite university should be able to GRADUATE and produced Nobel winners…not just buy and hire. There’s a difference.

Have a nice day…and a nice upcoming football season.

Papa John

Thanks for the link, Milo. Your source is worse than I thought. In case you missed it, here are the first two headings at the top of the Wikipedia page:

“This article uses citations that link to broken or outdated sources. Please improve the article or discuss this issue on the talk page. Help on using footnotes is available. February 2009″

I clicked on the footnoted Cal and Stanford links, and they both went to faculty pages. I was not able to find sources outside of Wikipedia that list Nobel prizes and degrees from institutions.

So, your data are both unreliable and outdated, hence specious. Nonetheless, based on my high impression of your alma mater and pending evidence to the contrary, I do accept your assertion that Cal has graduated more Nobel laureates than Stanford.

And I do appreciate the wishes for a nice day and football season. I wish you a nice day and… sorry, I can’t do the same for football. Old habits die hard.

milo

List of Stanfurd University GRADUATES who have received the Nobel Prize: